Well, yes, I'm fully aware and that's exactly what I want.
I'm against using the Zabbix Agent to check a local port, when I can easily use the Zabbix Server to check a remote port and at the same time have the full network path for that specific port tested.
On the first page of this thread I also posted the results of an nmap scan. Network connectivity is fine.
- The Zabbix Server and the Salt server are in the same subnet. There is no local firewall configured on neither the Zabbix Server nor the Salt server.
- An nmap scan from the Zabbix Server to the (Salt) [server]:[port] I want to monitor says the port is open.
- zabbix_get says the Salt service is open/active (result: 1). This is the expected result.
- Zabbix GUI (Latest data) says the port is closed/inactive (result: 0). I do not expect this result. The result from the SQL statements I executed earlier shows that a value of 0 is stored. You can find this in a previous reply I wrote.
(Edit: getting rid of the unintended smiley..)
I'm against using the Zabbix Agent to check a local port, when I can easily use the Zabbix Server to check a remote port and at the same time have the full network path for that specific port tested.
On the first page of this thread I also posted the results of an nmap scan. Network connectivity is fine.
- The Zabbix Server and the Salt server are in the same subnet. There is no local firewall configured on neither the Zabbix Server nor the Salt server.
- An nmap scan from the Zabbix Server to the (Salt) [server]:[port] I want to monitor says the port is open.
- zabbix_get says the Salt service is open/active (result: 1). This is the expected result.
- Zabbix GUI (Latest data) says the port is closed/inactive (result: 0). I do not expect this result. The result from the SQL statements I executed earlier shows that a value of 0 is stored. You can find this in a previous reply I wrote.
(Edit: getting rid of the unintended smiley..)
Comment